An official website of the United States government
This research paper addresses how faculty learn to become change agents in driving and sustaining change efforts in engineering education. Despite repeated calls and ample funding allotted to transform STEM higher education, initiatives targeted at the course and curriculum levels have not led to pervasive changes in how we educate undergraduate engineering students. Shifting the focus from what or how faculty teach, we turn to the structures that support change-making. Specifically, we examine the types of shared practices and interactions that help faculty develop change capacity and agency in the context of a cross-institutional community of practice (CoP). Our analysis emerged in the context of participatory action research with the National Science Foundation (NSF) Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) grant recipient teams, who come together during monthly virtual CoP sessions facilitated by our participatory action research team. Using participant observation, transcription, and qualitative analysis of 31 1-hour long meetings across three years, we map out facilitation practices and interpersonal interactions that empower participants to develop into a community of change agents in a field particularly prone to inertia. We situate our work at the intersection of theories of change from sociological and situated learning perspectives. Doing so, we address the relationship between structure and collective action, and how faculty exert control over social relations and available resources in their collective contexts to advance change goals. This exchange between social theory and engineering education has the potential to empower engineering faculty to mobilize for pervasive changes. Our findings address the ways that the organizational structure of and types of interactions in a CoP inform its participants’ ability to advance change goals. Firstly, participants learn to be a community of changemakers through regular reflective practices, which help diffuse knowledge between participants across organizational boundaries and levels of changemaking experience. Having a dedicated space to reflect on experiences leads to community building and a collective understanding of goals and how to achieve them. Secondly, faculty use their interpersonal interactions in the community of practice to leverage and build their connections to external individuals and to existing resources and social networks. These connections help them compile and reclaim resources or extend the existing resources to new contexts. In the practice of mobilizing change-making resources, we see faculty developing into a community of change agents: engaging in reflective processes and utilizing the resources within their institutional cultures to transform those very contexts.
more »
« less
Mobilizing Resources in a Community of Practice: How Academic Change Agents Work Toward Equity in their Change Projects
Transforming academic organizations to be more equitable and inclusive requires a range of change agents working together and engaging in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Central to this DEI work is learning how to create change. Yet, change agents do not always know at the outset what resources are necessary to enact change; they often acquire the necessary resources and skills over time. This research paper investigates how change agents participating in a community of practice (CoP) across academic institutions learn about and mobilize resources to transform engineering education. This analysis of resource mobilization mechanisms comes from research with the National Science Foundation (NSF) Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) grant recipient teams. To date, 26 teams have been funded through the RED mechanism to create revolutionary organizational and cultural changes within their departments with the goal of improving equity, inclusion, and educational outcomes. Projects vary in how they define and the degree to which they focus on equity. We find that resource mobilization practices in the CoP center and strengthen DEI values in two main ways. Firstly, participants learn about and gain access to resources that are explicitly DEIrelated: they mobilize resources to advance equity at the institutional level as an outcome of the projects and collaborate on additional projects to embed DEI into the process of change-making itself, starting from the initial stages of writing a proposal. Secondly, the way participants engage with each other, and approach change goals puts equity and inclusion into practice: participants identify and tackle structural barriers to change through DEI-aligned behaviors, from addressing how institutional circumstances create resistance to DEI, to developing a shared vision for systemic change that is inclusive and collaborative.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2005244
- PAR ID:
- 10496177
- Publisher / Repository:
- 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- https://strategy.asee.org/43936
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Resource Mobilization Communities of Practice Social movement schools pedagogy academic change collective action frames STEM higher education agency participatory action research
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: 798KB Other: .pdf
- Size(s):
- 798KB
- Location:
- Baltimore, MD
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Since its inception in 2015, the National Science Foundation Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) program has supported engineering and computer science educators as they work to transform the preparation of undergraduate students. As part of the program, members of RED teams connect with one another as a community of practice (CoP). More than just a collection of individuals who possess a shared interest, a CoP is defined by several distinct features: members of the CoP are practitioners; they develop a shared repertoire of resources that represent their shared practice; and they develop their community over time as a result of shared interaction. In our work with RED teams, we have identified aspects of their interactions that suggest that they operate as a CoP and gain benefits from their engagements. We see the RED CoP as instrumental to their success as change makers and an example of how CoPs can contribute to implementing change in other academic contexts.more » « less
-
This research paper investigates how individual change agents come together to form effective teams. Improving equity within academic engineering requires changes that are often too complex and too high-risk for a faculty member to pursue on their own. Teams offer the advantage of combining a diverse skill set of many individuals, as well as bringing together insider knowledge and external specialist expertise. However, in order for teams of academic change agents to function effectively, they must overcome the challenges of internal politics, power differentials, and group conflict. This analysis of team formation emerges from our participatory action research with recipients of the NSF Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) grants. Through an NSF-funded collaboration between the University of Washington and Rose-Hulman Institute of Technoliogy, we work with the RED teams to research the process of change as they work to improve equity and inclusion within their institutions. Utilizing longitudinal qualitative data from focus group discussions with 16 teams at the beginning and midpoints of their projects, we examine the development of teams to transform engineering education. Drawing on theoretical frameworks from social movement theory, we highlight the importance of creating a unified team voice and developing a sense of group agency. Teams have a better chance of achieving their goals if members are able to create a unified voice—that is, a shared sense of purpose and vision for their team. We find that the development of a team’s unified voice begins with proposal writing. When members of RED teams did not collaboratively write the grant proposal, they found it necessary to devote more time to develop a sense of shared vision for their project. For many RED teams, the development of a unified voice was further strengthened through external messaging, as they articulated a “we” in opposition to a “they” who have different values or interests. Group agency develops as a result of team members perceiving their goals as attainable and their efforts, as both individuals and a group, as worthwhile. That is, group agency is dependent on both the credibility of the team as well as trust among team members. For some of the RED teams, the NSF requirement to include social scientists and education researchers on their teams gave the engineering team members new, increased exposure to these fields. RED teams found that creating mutual respect was foundational for working across disciplinary differences and developing group agency.more » « less
-
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) professional societies (ProSs) are uniquely positioned to foster national-level diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) reform. ProSs serve broad memberships, define disciplinary norms and culture, and inform accrediting bodies and thus provide critical levers for systems change. STEM ProSs could be instrumental in achieving the DEI system reform necessary to optimize engagement of all STEM talent, leveraging disciplinary excellence resulting from diverse teams. Inclusive STEM system reform requires that underlying “mental models” be examined. The Inclusive Professional Framework for Societies (IPF: Societies) is an interrelated set of strategies that can help ProSs change leaders (i.e., “boundary spanners”) and organizations identify and address mental models hindering DEI reform. The IPF: Societies uses four “I's”—Identity awareness and Intercultural mindfulness (i.e., equity mindset) upon which inclusive relationships and Influential DEI actions are scaffolded. We discuss how the IPF: Societies complements existing DEI tools (e.g., Women in Engineering ProActive Network's Framework for Promoting Gender Equity within Organization; Amplifying the Alliance to Catalyze Change for Equity in STEM Success' Equity Environmental Scan Tool). We explain how the IPF: Societies can be applied to existing ProS policy and practice associated with common ProS functions (e.g., leadership, membership, conferences, awards, and professional development). The next steps are to pilot the IPF: Societies with a cohort of STEM ProSs. Ultimately, the IPF: Societies has potential to promote more efficient, effective, and lasting DEI organizational transformation and contribute to inclusive STEM disciplinary excellence.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)At the start of their work for the National Science Foundation’s Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) Program (IUSE/Professional Formation of Engineers, NSF 19-614), RED teams face a variety of challenges. Not only must they craft a shared vision for their projects and create strategic partnerships across their campuses to move the project forward, they must also form a new team and communicate effectively within the team. Our work with RED teams over the past 5 years has highlighted the common challenges these teams face at the start, and for that reason, we have developed the RED Start Up Session, a ½ day workshop that establishes best practices for RED teams’ work and allows for early successes in these five year projects. As the RED Participatory Action Research team (REDPAR)--comprised of individuals from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and the University of Washington--we have taken the research data collected as we work with RED teams and translated it into practical strategies that can benefit RED teams as they embark on their projects. This presentation will focus on the content and organization of the Start Up Session and how these lessons learned can contribute to the furthering of the goals of the RED program: to design “revolutionary new approaches to engineering education,” focusing on “organizational and cultural change within the departments, involving students, faculty, staff, and industry in rethinking what it means to provide an engineering program.” We see the Start Up Session as an important first step in the RED team establishing an identity as a team and learning how to work effectively together. We also encourage new RED teams to learn from the past, through a panel discussion with current RED team members who fill various roles on the teams: engineering education researcher, project manager, project PI, disciplinary faculty, social scientist, and others. By presenting our findings from the Start Up Session at ASEE, we believe we can contribute to the national conversation regarding change in engineering education as it is evidenced in the RED team’s work.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--43936
